No abstract

No abstract

Background and Aims Obesity is common and associated with unique phenotypic features in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Therefore, understanding the efficacy and safety of new therapies in HFpEF patients with obesity is important. The effects of dapagliflozin were examined according to body mass index (BMI) among patients in DELIVER. Methods BMI was analyzed by World Health Organization (WHO) categories and as a continuous variable using restricted cubic splines. Results BMI ranged from 15.2 to 50 kg/m2 with a mean value of 29.8 (SD ± 6.1) kg/m2. The proportions, by WHO category, were: normal weight 1343 (21.5%); overweight 2073 (33.1%); class I obesity 1574 (25.2%); class II obesity 798 (12.8%); class III obesity 415 (6.6%). Compared to placebo, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary outcome to a similar extent across these categories: hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) 0.89 (0.69-1.15), 0.87 (0.70-1.08), 0.74 (0.58-0.93), 0.78 (0.57-1.08), and 0.72 (0.47-1.08), respectively (P-interaction = 0.82). The placebo-corrected change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score with dapagliflozin at 8 months was: 0.9 (-1.1, 2.8), 2.5 (0.8, 4.1), 1.9 (-0.1, 3.8), 2.7 (-0.5, 5.8), and 8.6 (4.0, 13.2) points, respectively (P-interaction = 0.03). The placebo-corrected change in weight at 12 months was: -0.88 (-1.28, -0.47), -0.65 (-1.04, -0.26), -1.42 (-1.89, -0.94), -1.17 (-1.94, -0.40), and -2.50 (-4.4, -0.64) kg (P-interaction = 0.002). Conclusions Obesity is common in patients with HFpEF and is associated with higher rates of heart failure hospitalization and worse health status. Treatment with dapagliflozin improves cardiovascular outcomes across the spectrum of BMI, leads to greater symptom improvement in patients with obesity, compared to those without, and has the additional benefit of causing modest weight loss.

BackgroundLittle is know about the outcomes of acute heart failure (AHF) with acute coronary syndrome (ACS-AHF), compared to those without ACS (NACS-AHF).MethodsWe conducted a prospective registry of AHF patients involving 18 hospitals in Saudi Arabia between October 2009 and December 2010. In this sub-study, we compared the clinical correlates, management and hospital course, as well as short, and long-term outcomes between AHF patients with and without ACS.ResultsOf the 2609 AHF patients enrolled, 27.8 % presented with ACS. Compared to NACS-AHF patients, ACS-AHF patients were more likely to be old males (Mean age = 62.7 vs. 60.8 years, p = 0.003, and 73.8 % vs. 62.7 %, p < 0.001, respectively), and to present with De-novo heart failure (56.6 % vs. 28.1 %, p < 0.001). Additionally they were more likely to have history of ischemic heart disease, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and less likely to have chronic kidney disease (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). The prevalence of severe LV systolic dysfunction (EF < 30 %) was higher in ACS-AHF patients. During hospital stay, ACS-AHF patients were more likely to develop shock (p < 0.001), recurrent heart failure (p = 0.02) and needed more mechanical ventilation (p < 0.001). β blockers and Angiotensin Converting Enzyme inhibitors were used more often in ACS-AHF patients (p = 0.001 and, p = 0.004 respectively). ACS- AHF patients underwent more coronary angiography and had higher prevalence of multi-vessel coronary artery disease (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). The unadjusted hospital and one-month mortality were higher in ACS-AHF patients (OR = 1.6 (1.2–2.2), p = 0.003 and 1.4 (1.0–1.9), p = 0.026 respectively). A significant interaction existed between the level of left ventricular ejection fraction and ACS-AHF status. After adjustment, ACS-AHF status was only significantly associated with hospital mortality (OR = 1.6 (1.1–2.4), p = 0.019). The three-years survival following hospital discharge was not different between the two groups.ConclusionAHF patients presenting with ACS had worse hospital prognosis, and an equivalent long-term survival compared to AHF patients without ACS. These findings underscore the importance of timely recognition and management of AHF patients with concomitant ACS given their distinct presentation and underlying pathophysiology compared to other AHF patients.

ImportanceMost epidemiological studies of heart failure (HF) have been conducted in high-income countries with limited comparable data from middle- or low-income countries.ObjectiveTo examine differences in HF etiology, treatment, and outcomes between groups of countries at different levels of economic development.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsMultinational HF registry of 23 341 participants in 40 high-income, upper–middle-income, lower–middle-income, and low-income countries, followed up for a median period of 2.0 years.Main Outcomes and MeasuresHF cause, HF medication use, hospitalization, and death.ResultsMean (SD) age of participants was 63.1 (14.9) years, and 9119 (39.1%) were female. The most common cause of HF was ischemic heart disease (38.1%) followed by hypertension (20.2%). The proportion of participants with HF with reduced ejection fraction taking the combination of a β-blocker, renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist was highest in upper–middle-income (61.9%) and high-income countries (51.1%), and it was lowest in low-income (45.7%) and lower–middle-income countries (39.5%) (P &amp;lt; .001). The age- and sex- standardized mortality rate per 100 person-years was lowest in high-income countries (7.8 [95% CI, 7.5-8.2]), 9.3 (95% CI, 8.8-9.9) in upper–middle-income countries, 15.7 (95% CI, 15.0-16.4) in lower–middle-income countries, and it was highest in low-income countries (19.1 [95% CI, 17.6-20.7]). Hospitalization rates were more frequent than death rates in high-income countries (ratio = 3.8) and in upper–middle-income countries (ratio = 2.4), similar in lower–middle-income countries (ratio = 1.1), and less frequent in low-income countries (ratio = 0.6). The 30-day case-fatality rate after first hospital admission was lowest in high-income countries (6.7%), followed by upper–middle-income countries (9.7%), then lower–middle-income countries (21.1%), and highest in low-income countries (31.6%). The proportional risk of death within 30 days of a first hospital admission was 3- to 5-fold higher in lower–middle-income countries and low-income countries compared with high-income countries after adjusting for patient characteristics and use of long-term HF therapies.Conclusions and RelevanceThis study of HF patients from 40 different countries and derived from 4 different economic levels demonstrated differences in HF etiologies, management, and outcomes. These data may be useful in planning approaches to improve HF prevention and treatment globally.